Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Uh good evening. Uh let me call this uh meeting of the Concord Township Zoning Commission for Tuesday, April the 7th, 2026 to order. Uh let us rise and those that can rise. Pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Uh Heather, could we have roll call, please? Mr. Chairman, um if you don't mind. Yes,

we have the the public hearing scheduled first before going into the regular meeting. We can roll call even before roll call. Oh, I'm sorry. I mean, we could do a roll call for the public hearing. I think that that'd be fine if you guys want me to, but can we? Yes, I'd be happy to. Yes. Okay. Mr. Horton, present. Mrs. Wley, present. Mr. Rert, present. Mr. Schindler, present. And Mr. Eley, here. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay. So, um before we convene our public hearing hearing, I just wanted to formally welcome Amanda Wokeley and Mark Horton to our board towards winning commission. Welcome. Welcome. Thank you.

Good luck. Hope it all goes well for you. Um uh my preference is for members to be recognized by the chair normally, especially in a public hearing, but but for for our commission meeting, we're typically eye contact and we see we typically recognize to speak. Uh except when Hyram gets out of order, I'll step in. Take care of that. Good luck. Good luck.

Okay. So um first first order of business is to open the public hearing. It's this is a continuation of the public hearing we initiated on March the 3 to consider uh six amendments to our zoning resolution. Um uh these amendments are were been worked on uh by our board and are being presented for public comment at this public hearing. Uh the amendments uh for the record uh I will read the six amendments into the record that are being considered as part of this public hearing. Uh, amendment number one is to revise section 30 sign regulations, including updating purpose statements, definitions, temporary and permanent sign allowances, prohibited signs, design and illumination criteria, administrative procedures, adding new rules for flag poles, and a severability and substitution clause. Amendment number two is to revise section 5.02 A76 to amend the definition of flag. Amendment number three is to revise section 11.01H to adjust the cross reference to section 30.15 in regards to temporary and permanent signs. Amendment number four revise section 15.02A 2A to add to add flag poles to the list of accessory uses and to delete 15.03H flag poles relocate gar garage sale regulations to new section 15.03M. Amendment number five revise section 22.03

table of uses to add flag poles. Revise section 22.07 07 to add new section E flag polls. Amendment number six, revise appendix one, zoning fee schedule to add fees for solar energy systems and electric vehicle charging stations and revise fees for permit uh applications. Uh we this is a as I mentioned this is a continuation of public hearing we first held on March the 3 uh to consider these amendments. Um uh subsequent to that public hearing we also held a work session to also review and consider uh th those amendments. As a result of that, uh we have before us modifications uh per a memorandum uh from our zoning inspector uh dated March 31st. And also for the record, I will read these modifications into the record uh that are being considered for uh uh both amendment number one and amendment number six. Modifications for amendment number one include one, revise proposed section 30.028 definition and replace with commercial message any sign, wording, logo or other representation that directly or indirectly names, advertises or calls attention to a business, product, service or other commercial activity. Two, revise section 30.02 02 to add a new definition non-commercial message. Any sign, wording, logo, or other representation that is not defined as a commercial message. Three, revise section 30.02 to update the definition of political sign as follows. Any sign having

reference to a political official, candidate, question, issue, or opinion. Four, revise proposed section 30.09 09 C to state temporary signs in residential districts or lots being used for residential temporary signs are permitted for residential uses subject to the following provisions. Five revise proposed section 30.09C1 09 C1 to state each residentially used lot may be permitted to erect one or more temporary signs either as a either as building window or freestanding sign provided that no such sign shall be larger than 8 square ft or height greater than 4 feet. Six delete the time frames proposed section 30.09 09 C2 and replace with temporary signs may be displayed on private property being used for residential purposes without limitation on duration. Seven, revise proposed section 30.09D to state temporary signs in non-residential districts. Temporary signs with the commercial message may be permitted subject to the following provisions. Eight, revise proposed section 30.09D1 09D1 to state, "One temporary sign no larger than 16 square feet in size and 4 feet in height may be permitted on a lot in a non-residential district. If on a lot with multiple tenants, each tenant may have one sign in compliance with these provisions. Nine, delete proposed section sections 30.09E, F, and G. 10. Revise proposed section 30.12B to reference 30.11 instead of 30.10. 11. Revise proposed section 30.12F to state signs with wheels or signs on vehicles or trailers which are

determined to be clearly temporary and placed in locations not normally expected for such vehicle or trailer with the primary purpose of attracting attention or providing advertising. Also adjust lettering for subsequent sections G and H. 12. Delete proposed section 30.14 B4. 13. Revise proposed section 30.15A. Add new row listing political signs and an X under the no zoning permit required column. 14. Revise proposed section 30.15A under temporary signs for commercial and nonresidential uses. No zoning permit required. 15. Delete proposed section 30.15C temporary sign permit. Those are the 15 modifications to amendment number one. We have one to consider that we reviewed modification to amendment number six and that is one under sign permit applications delete temporary special event sign and the $25 deposit.

Mr. Chairman, yes. Under amendment number one, item number eight, the last line. If a lot, if on a lot with multiple tenants, each tenant may have one sign. My my text has on. Agreed. I read one because that's what's in the code. I just corrected it myself when I read it. Thank you. Yep. Thank you, Aaron. Yep.

You're always got a good eye for those things. Thank you. Um, okay. So, with that, um, uh, we're continuing the public hearing and it's, uh, now open for for public comment. Any person wishing to speak before us, uh, from the public, please come forth. Name, address, please. Sorry. I know. Little day.

Thank you. Hi, Vanessa Pessik 11705 Cali Court in Concord. Welcome to the new members. Congratulations. This will be your first public hearing and there'll be an audience participation. So that you know that's exciting because it doesn't happen too often. Doesn't happen too often.

No. Exactly. Uh so I have a statement here that I would just it's easier just to read it than to try to go off the cuff. So, um, first of all, I appreciate all the work that you've done to update the zoning text signage, uh, text and also to make it compliant with the binding consent judgment and decree that Concord Township signed in 2005. And at the last public hearing and at the subsequent special meeting, you worked to s simplify the temporary sign section of the zoning text. However, the revised zoning text you received on Thursday and I received on Thursday still has significant infringements to the consent judgment and decree. These infringements have potentially uh costly legal challenges to the township. Generally speaking, political signs are broadly defined. Yet, there are places in the proposed zoning text that require uh permit fees, zoning um permits, fees, and imposed number limits, and durational limits to signs that can be interpreted as political signs. Now the purpose clause in 30 in 0130-1H is a good faith effort but does not by itself cure conflicts with a consent judgment. The operative text is the actual important part of the text. So for instance, a permanent sign can be considered a political sign and the restrictions on a permanent sign conflict with the consent judgment. The restrictions include a permit fee and a limit of one sign. Similarly, the

temporary signs in non-residential districts also conflict with a consent judgment by imposing a 30-day display period and four times per year frequency capacity. Further, it limits the category to only one temporary sign. Finally, there is an important question regarding light pole banners and political signs. A resident may want to use a banner with a political message and currently the regulations require a permit fee and the restrict the number of banners. These conflicts should be rewritten before they're approved. And one reason for the design code text update was to comply with the uh Reed versus Town of Gilbert Supreme Court ruling in 2015. So, additionally on that subject, uh the proposed text is I would consider a largely well draft with the temporary sign and political sign language, but it contains several provisions with real constitutional vulnerability under the Reed versus Town of Gilbert and the subsequent six court president, the political sign definition, the commercial message language, and the non non-commercial flag definition are the three provisions most likely to draw a challenge under read and the sixth court strict reading of it. An attorney should review these specific provisions and consider consider either removing the content referencing definitions or ensuring that no operative rule ever applies differently based on what the sign says. It's a lot of legal ease and I understand and I think that's why this is so difficult because it's not only uh requiring that you comply with the

consent decree but also the read definition the read uh court case as well as ensuing definitions. So it you have a very very difficult task to thread the needle and and I understand that and I appreciate the work that you have done so far to to make that happen. So in conclusion, I'd ask that you either continue the public hearing and make the necessary changes or I don't know if this is possible. You could vote no on accepting the changes and then have more time to consult with attorneys and um professionals to make sure that this is uh quite legally binding.

Okay. And that's it. And I am here for any questions. Thank you. Um I don't believe we have any other comment from the public. um uh as part of the public hearing and we're just listening to the public. So if you don't have anything else and we don't have any other member to speak before the board, I'm going to close the public hearing. Uh at this time I'm going to close the public hearing. Thank you. Yep.

Okay. So, with that, we go return to our agenda. Correct me if I'm wrong, G. We'll return to our agenda. The next order of business is approval of minutes. Um, I don't think we have any, right? No, unless I do not. No. Yeah.

Material. Uh, uh, correspondence. So typically uh Mark, Amanda, if any of you have received uh voice communications or emails, texts, whatnot from a member of public regarding business of this the township, we ask that you bring that forth uh to the board. Um so I'm presuming you might not have had any to this point. Not yet. Yeah. So Frank, none, Mr. Chairman. None, Mr. Chairman. And uh myself, I have none as well. But I should say other than other than the correspondence regarding Miss Pessik's uh uh issues before us on our sign regulations, lengthy sets of emails on that.

I did receive that. Um uh our uh next item here is our zoning inspector report. Heather, oh which actually I do not have one prepared this evening. Okay. So, sometimes I give an update on like permit activity and other things that are um going along going around in the township, but we do not have one this evening. Good. Okay. Thank you. Um uh the public participation, we typically have public participation after the public hearing. We also has always have that in the agenda and uh not seeing any any anybody present for public participation. We're going to move right on to uh new business. Oh.

Oh, I'm sorry. I should ask new business. I'm sorry. Having people here.

New business. Uh, new business number one. Um, we have a site plan review application number 64. Mr. Perry Blossom ZSI Manufacturing is requesting a site plan and design review approval for a warehouse addition located at 8059 Crow Road, also known as parcel number 08- A-20-0-0000-24-0. Um, I don't see any representative from ZSI. easy to say CSI Metro Manufacturing here. U we we have not heard formally from them.

I didn't until I just sent an email and I got a response back um from their civil engineer and I asked if anyone was planning on attending the the meeting to present their application and he said that he was sorry that no one got back to me and he believed that their intention was to table and to submit um some revisions in a couple weeks to be on the May agenda. Okay. So, yeah, that just came in in the last five minutes. So, I apologize. It looked like I was on my phone. I was trying to uh make something happen. Consider that before we consider that being tabled, do you want to report on the application at this point just to brief us or what your

um we is that is that okay? Give a little background on that or background. You can give have background. Sure. Okay. Yeah. Yeah.

Sure. I can give some background on what this application was um or is rather. Uh so with commercial projects and and multif family, we acquired a site plan review and design review. Um that's what this board is charged with looking at these plans. Um ZSI is an existing light manufacturer. He was located on Cryle Road, actually just s uh south of the Discount Drug Mart shopping center. um they've been in that building for maybe five or six years now and now they're looking to put on a rather large um warehouse addition to expand the business there. They they make um some kind of widget there that now they're they're making more of. Um so this is about a 16,000 foot uh building addition that'll come right off the existing south side of the building. Um they're going to reconfigure the parking lot and update some of the landscaping hopefully and um do some work on the storm water basin um to make sure it captures all the the storm water. Um I did provide to you guys a staff report which the applicant has as well. There were some items that I noted that were deficient um not compliant with zoning regarding um especially the building design. Um, so under the design review, um, we have some regulations there. Um, and there were some concerns from staff regarding what the existing building looked like versus what the addition was going to be and some of the renderings that were submitted to you guys. I they were not really reflective on on what it was actually going to look like.

Um, and the other thing that was somewhat missing was um, the landscape plan um, which is a requirement to be submitted as well. And so within that landscape plan, they are going to be required to plant some trees and some shrubs and around the building as well. Um I did have a recommendation um unfortunately it was to deny the application because there were some deficiencies on the site plan um that do not meet zoning. I um in one of the other things was the um they have these mechanical units that they're proposing on the outside of the building. Um Hyram, Mrs. your Bailey Wick, but they have some air rotator units that they're going to put on the exterior of the building that they haven't proposed any kind of screening for. Um, and in our design review requirements, they are required to screen that with similar building materials of what the building is going to be. So, those are some of the things that we were hoping that they would come back with. um

sounded like they were going to maybe table and then they didn't get back to me because of the the staff's recommendation. But again, the email that I just received tonight does seem that that that is what they would prefer to do. Um this is a first where we've had something on the application and the applicant hasn't actually showed up. So, um, we can, uh, I think that's probably enough for a summary this evening, but I I think at the maybe at the request of the applicant that it would be appropriate to to delay a vote and let them come back next month, maybe with some additional information to staff in advance or you might get a revised site plan with maybe revised recommendation depending on what's submitted.

Thank you, Heather. Not only the design review, I thought the site plan was a lot of deficiencies on that side as well. Right. I mean, I saw the storm water Yeah. questions quite quite a bit lacking on the plans. Yeah. Because the one thing I did fail to mention was they um under the zoning resolution, they could do like a deferred parking. Yes. um requirement, but it does require them to calculate

still do calculations in the storm water to make sure that if they are forced to build all of the required minimum parking that the storm water infrastructure is already there to capture that runoff. Um and so as part in order for the township zoning commission to be comfortable with their deferred parking, there were some things that they were still going to need to complete in order to to meet that criteria. So, yep. Very good. Very good. Um, I'm sure I'm sure they'll hopefully they'll revise and resubmit the I know both the engineer and the architect here. I know they'll do good work. Yeah. Yeah. That seemed like they might have rushed this in quite possibly. Yeah.

Uh before before it was really complete. Okay. Thank you for that. Any comments uh board on that? Just want to get on background. I see that in your staff report that there are under section 4 three options that we that could be taken. One is to approve it, one is to conditionally approve it, one is to deny it. Correct. This is a business that has been located here since 1974. Correct. It's putting an addition on. Well, they haven't been here since 1974, actually. No, they the warehouse was been the um

So I saw that they've been been here since 1974. I'm sorry. Oh, yeah. The original building that they are located in was originally constructed. That isn't okay. CSI moved in in 2017. 2017. Yes, sir. And and have are they viewed as a uh uh as being in compliance with everything since they've moved in? Are there any zoning issues or any issues at all with this company and and Concord Township? Not that I'm aware of. Okay. Yeah. Cuz what I'm just thinking is I mean we're coming into excavation season. Mhm.

And one thought is to go ahead and try to allow them to continue to advance is give a conditional approval. Um, on the other hand, because they weren't able to come tonight, um, maybe rather than tableing it, we deny it and let them start over. So, that's where I'm at. I'm not being punitive. I'm just trying to understand you know if if we're going to garner some you know some sure compliance then sure we should not just perhaps should not just table it that's a good question

yeah I mean the concern with denying it um they do have to resubmit everything they have to resubmit everything fee everything it's like starting over so that might put them a little bit more behind right rather than Yeah I think it would that's why I looked at the second option well I I guess rule procedural They've requested it to be tabled. That's that am I correct? That is what the civil engineer thought was supposed to happen. Okay. Okay. So that's their request. Um um procedurally uh I tend to honor the request especially for tableabling but you know that's just me withdrawing my but certainly respect that. Yeah.

Yeah. Any other comments? Well, based upon the comments from the staff, sure look to me as if we could deny it. Okay. And and they have to respond to those comments anyway. Mhm. So, they're going to come back and respond. Yeah, that one's okay. That one's okay. That one's okay. Then we can conditionally approve it. But I don't think we ought to conditionally approve it now. I don't think anybody's made but we can table. I think they're requesting it to be tabled. Yes. Okay. That's their request. Yeah. Yeah. But that is not necessarily bind us.

The issue on on the table is whether we deny it uh as the staff report suggests table.

Well, and if you don't mind, Mr. So, like what you were saying, if you did offer, say they showed up tonight and they wanted to move forward and you know, they were able to talk through all of these um deficiencies in an in a manner that you got that satisfied you, then obviously at that point you could have switched your you know, your re you don't have to follow staff recommendation. It could have been a conditional approval with maybe one, two or three things that they still needed to come back with. Good point. So, like for me, like looking at the things that they're deficient on seems like a lot of these are no-brainers, right? But some of them not so much that I think that you guys would really want to see like, okay, what are you going to do with those air rotator units? What are you really going to do with the facade of the building? Those are big picture things that like you're I know this board that you're going to want to see before approving.

Yeah. But, Mr. Mr. Chairman, I agree. Like I think if the applicant is intent is to table, then that would probably be best to allow them to table and um resubmit a few items and then for next month maybe we say reluctantly tech. Well, I mean, come on. I think it's first of all, the applicant, it's his it's his proposal. He's come on the board for asking for approval for his building.

If he wants to table it, that's fine. That's his choice. I think especially now spending time going over or whatever. You know, he's already got seeing what the staff report is. My impression is he's going to fix everything and do everything and say he's fixed everything and try to make it as clean as possible. Then we can vote on it. So just going ahead and denying it to me makes no sense. Okay. Right. Give him the opportunity. He knows I think right now that's why they're not here because you know he's got a job to take care of this. Mhm. Well, thank you Frank. But unless there's a a motion otherwise I don't believe I need a motion to table.

Am I right or I think it might be clear that way motion table and then just vote on that and then move forward table or deny. So, I wouldn't do deny. I would just say motion to table. Oh, no. But I'm leaving it to the discretion of the board. I see. Okay. Not me. If there's a if there's a motion to say deny and take a vote, I have a question to that then. And again, I'm just I'm new, so I haven't had a chance to read through that big binder you gave me, but um how long um that's a black mark, by the way. How how long will that postponement be in place? The tableabling 60. Yeah, the tableing postpone the I think would be table it till the next zoning commission meeting

30 days. Yeah. The next meeting I believe is May 5th. Fifth. Yeah. So whatever. So they would hopefully come back with a set a set of site plans that like you said fixes everything. Sure. In 30 days. I believe they realize that by seeing this already.

So they know they got work ahead of them to move it along. So on they do decide to get started, they can start immediately with our of course if we approve it. I think that's I got the feeling that's their intent. That's why they're not here tonight. They know they got some homework to do. So they're going to be working on it right now. So it comes in in my estimation to be clean as possible. So any further discussion? No, Mr. Chairman. Is there any motion? Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we should by request that the applicant table this till our next meeting. I have a motion to table. Is there a second?

I'll second. Uh motion is seconded. Uh uh roll call vote, please. Okay. Mr. Rert? Yes. Mr. Schindler? Yes. Miss Miss Willey? Yes. Mr. Horton? Yes. Mr. Eiffel? Yes. Okay. Thank you, board. So that um and and thank you Heather for the summarizing that for us. Uh so should we keep this for next month? I would hang on to that and then if I receive any updates I'll send it to you our next packet. Very good.

All right. Um so uh now we revert back to our second item which is our decision for our proposed zoning text amendments. Um we will now consider amendments number 1 through six uh that we have worked on for quite a few months. Um we've held a public hearing um over two months as well. Um, so at this point, um, I open it for discussion to board on the proposed zoning text amendments. Uh, for questions or comments, uh, let's direct them uh, via the memorandum that Heather gave us on March March 31st on each particular section andor any comments you heard from the public regarding same. Um, so maybe I'll start over here, Frank. Uh, for right now, I think first of all, Heather, you've done a great job for all the meetings we've had and everything. I deeply appreciate all your efforts and your input. Secondly, I think we've had many, many meetings and work sessions on this and I feel right now at this moment, I would move that we go ahead and vote on each one of these at the present time.

Very good. Other concerns? Yes. Very good. Thank you. You're welcome.

Hi, please. Well, from what I've heard, I think we can go through this again and again and again. And I'm sure somebody will still be coming up and saying, "I still have some issues with this with this statement. I still have some issues with that statement." Uh whether they're legal battles or not, I don't know. I don't know if they're ever going to come up. So, let's just go ahead and do it. Let's discuss each one and have comments up here and then let's go. Let's vote. Good. Nothing else.

No, sir. Thank you, Aron. So, uh to my right are esteemed new guests and members. Yeah. Anything you offer, Amanda? I know to put you on the spot here, this is new.

Mr. Chairman, I just I think that um that it was very clear. I went kind of back through the history of where this started and I had some questions for Heather and others. um trying to get as much information as possible so I felt comfortable voting as being a member of the board and um yeah so I I appreciate kind of the history of everything and and the work that's been done previous to me and thank you for presenting it in a format that I felt comfortable with evaluating. Very good. Thank you. Amanda Mark, please. Mr. Chairman, I echo my colleagues observations and comments on this.

Very good. ready to move forward.

Yep. Um uh I'll offer u uh my own thoughts. Uh the the uh consent judgment that was entered into by the township over 20 years ago um has kind of stood the test of time for a while. Yes, there is a 2015 Reed Gilbert case that was of concern, but that is why we we did what we did uh relative to the sign regulations and I think we addressed it uh uh very well. Um so I'm comfortable with it uh with what we've done here particularly section 30. Obviously we have six six amendments here interrelated but section 30 is the is the gist of it. um uh before we consider this uh uh an adoption as we know whatever we do once we've held the public hearing it still go before the board of trustees right

for final adoption so u I do want to defer consult with our legal counsel just to offer uh any comment closing comment for the board's information bry if you could please

sure so I think um based on all of the work that has been done in the reraft drafting and especially at the um the continue well the public hearing that began last month and then the continuation this month but in between the work session. I think um especially with the modifications to the proposed amendment one and the rest of the amendments I think that they comply with the consent judgment entry and I think that they will sustain or uh um they will be able to be upheld constitutionally um if challenged. But again, I think some of the hypotheticals are tough to I think analyze specifically when they're hypotheticals. Um, but I think that this is a um a very good um draft of a contentneutral um sign regulation.

Very good. Thank you, Bri. And I do want to thank the public for comments, particularly Mr. Pesk. Uh they're obviously thought what thoughtful thoughtfully placed before us for consideration. Thank you for all that for the public. But um uh so I'm going to put this uh up for uh motion to consider. We'll consider each amendment individually. Uh beginning with amendment number one. Do I have a motion to approve uh or yeah motion to approve amendment number one. to a motion revise section 30 sign regulations including updating purpose statements, definitions, temporary and permanent sign allowances, prohibited signs, design and illumination criteria, administrative procedures, adding new rules for flag poles and a severability and substitution clause. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to approve amendment one as written.

No, we need to make sure, excuse me, that we include the modifications as revised. Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. All all the modifications from plus all the modifications from the memorandum of March 31, 2026, uh, they're already written into or read into the read into the minutes. Yes. So the 15 modifications. Yeah. The one and the modifications for amendment number one. Very good. Okay. So we have a motion to approve amendment number one together with the modifica 15 modifications that were read into the record. Do we have a second? I second. Mr. Chairman,

we have a motion and a second to approve amendment number one together with the 15 modifications. Uh roll call vote, please. Mr. Horton. Yes. Miss Oakley. Yes. Mr. Rert. Yes. Mr. Schindler. Yes. Mr. Eles. Yes. Uh, moving on. Uh, amendment number two, revise section 5.02A76 to amend the definition of flag. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we approve amendment number two. We have a motion to approve amendment number two. Do we have a second?

I second, Mr. Chairman. Motion and a second made for amendment number two uh revise section 5.02A76 to amend the definition of flag. Roll call. Heather. Miss Wley. Yes. Mr. Robert. Yes. Mr. Schindler. Yes. Mr. Horton. Yes. Mr. Eles. Yes. Uh amendment. We have next amendment number three to consider revise section 11.01H to adjust the cross reference to section 30.15 in regards to temporary and permanent signs. Mr. Chairman,

I make a motion that we approve amendment number three. Motion to approve amendment number three. Mr. Chairman, I second that motion. Have motion and second approve amendment number three, revise section 11.01H to adjust the cross reference to section 30.15 in regards to temporary and permanent signs. Heather, roll call. Mr. Ruffford, yes. Mr. Schindler, yes. Mr. Horton, yes. Miss Willey, yes. Mr. Eleas,

yes. Okay. Uh, next item we have to consider is amendment number four, revise section 15.02A to add flag poles to the list of accessory uses and to delete 15.03H flag poles, relocate garage sale regulations to new section 15.03M. Mr. Chairman, I so move that we accept the the amendment number three as revised. No, four. I'm sorry. Four as revised March 31st. Thank you, friend. We have a motion to approve amendment number four. I'll second.

And and we have a second for uh to approve amendment number four, revise section 15.02A to add flag poles to the list of accessory uses and to delete 15.03H flag poles, relocate garage sale regulations to new section 15.03M. Roll call. Heather. Mr. Horton. Yes. Miss Willey. Yes. Mr. Rert. Yes. Mr. Schindler. Yes. Mr. Eiffel.

Yes. Uh, next uh item is amendment number five, revise section 22.03, table of uses to add flag poles. Revise section 22.07 to add new section E flag poles. It's the right hand right hand right hand side of the table this time. So I should propose the you may you may do as you please. I'm going to defer to this is going so well. I'll make a motion we approve amendment number five. We have a motion to approve amendment number five. Do I have a second? Mr. Chairman. I second the motion.

We have a second first and motion and second to approve amendment number five. Revise section 22.03 03 table of uses to add flag poles. Revise section 22.07 to add new section E flag poles. Roll call. Heather. Mr. Horton. Yes. Miss Bley. Yes. Mr. Refford. Yes. Mr. Schindler. Yes. Mr. Eiffel.

Yes. Amendment number six uh to consider last this evening revise append appendix one zoning fee schedule to add fees for solar energy systems and electric vehicle charging stations and revise fees for signed permit applications together with the modification uh to this amendment as noted in the memorandum of March 31st, 2026 which states under signed permit applications delete tempor special event sign and and the $25 deposit.

Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we approve amendment number six with the modification given in the memo dated March 31 2026. Have a motion to approve amendment number six and plus the modification. Mr. Chairman, I second that motion. Motion in a second to approve amendment number six together with the modification as noted u uh at March 31st memorandum. Roll call. Mr. Horton. Yes. Miss Wley. Yes. Mr. Rert. Yes. Mr. Schindler. Yes. Mr. Eiffel. Yes. Okay. Thank you. That was painless. Yes.

Yes, it was.

Maybe for you. Kind of parched. Yeah. that you are. All right. Sorry. Um on our agenda, uh we have old business uh to uh close up here. Number one or one is to establish a designated final date for completion of the sidewalk in accordance with the agreement between Concord Township Zoning Commission and the IN9 Group LLC for the property located at Old Cry and Cra being parcel number 08- 020- 0-0000-48-0. Uh this has been tabled until July 2026 um

which is right around the corner which is coming up which is coming up. So um unless there's any objection that this u item uh agenda item will remain tabled. Um the other uh item we have in old business is the election is tabled currently election of vice chairman chair chairperson is tabled and I would suggest that it remain tabled um until we talk about it again

that was artful technical the technical term Mhm. Okay. That's actually legal, isn't it? Absolutely. Okay. If there's no objection to what I just said to

um I I don't know if this is appropriate. I just for maybe this is new business. I apologize. I wanted to bring up an item. I don't know if I'm on order. It's kind of new business, but wanted to talk about our our real quickly our site plan design plan. Um uh in past meetings we've had kind of uh informal discussion regarding the fact that an applicant and we consider a site plan review and a design review totally separate. Design review meaning structure and site plan. There's different things we're looking at in both.

Uh and I just throw this out. I I had found I think on the last one or two some confusion from the applicants regarding the fact that we we're doing two separate. Um Heather, could I ask is there is that have some history to why we we just don't combine design and review into just one. So essentially what we do is we review the site plan, we approve it, then we got to review the design, review, design and we have to review and prove that different criteria. So with remember what happened with the uh project and one was approved and the other wasn't. Yes. So we went back and looked at

the the process on that and and moving forward it really truly is site plan review with the design approval as part of it. So it it's one vote moving forward. Um where you're as part of the site plan review the design review approval is required. So it's you're when you're like tonight if this was moving forward it you would have been approving the whole the site plan review application which includes the design review which I should have written on the actual agenda. I only wrote site plan review. It should have stated site plan review and design review. Um but that was going to be one motion one approval. Look at everything together. Okay. That's you that's why I asked the question. It kind of hit me before and then I saw it just says site plan review.

It should have said site plan and design review and I'll make sure it says it on the next. Yeah. You weren't going to they weren't going to come back with a separate design application. It was should have been part of your packet as well. I noticed your review comments did go ahead and extend out to that to both site plan and design review. So, Right. Right. Yes. And then under my recommendation, it was Okay. So, yeah. Yeah. They're combined. They're coin. Yeah. Good. Good. Okay. So, thanks.

You're welcome. Um uh before I leave that any other comments for board before move on our next our next meeting is May the 5th 2026 unless there's nothing else for for the good of the order uh this uh this meeting stands adjourned. Okay.